DE-SEN: Ocasio-Cortez deploys staff to campaign against Tom Carper

[RandySF]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the 28-year old former waitress who shocked Democratic Party politics by defeating Rep. Joe Crowley, D-New York, in a primary last month, is deploying members of her growing campaign staff to help another liberal upstart seeking to unseat a longtime Democratic incumbent.

Ocasio-Cortez this week decided to send at least three paid campaign staffers to Delaware to help Kerri Evelyn Harris, an Air Force veteran and community activist who is challenging three-term Sen. Thomas R. Carper, D-Delaware, in a Sept. 6 primary. Aides to Ocasio-Cortez and Harris shared the details first with CBS News.

Harris, a political novice based in Dover, Delaware, began her campaign in February, seeking to run to the senator's left. She is only the second Democrat to challenge Carper since he joined the U.S. Senate in 2000.

There is no reliable polling to gauge Harris' viability in Delaware, where just a few thousand Democrats voted when Carper faced a primary challenge in 2012. If she wins, Harris would be Delaware's first biracial lesbian woman to serve in Congress -- and the first-ever to serve in the U.S. Senate.

Harris faces daunting odds, given Carper's four decades of political success -- but so did Ocasio-Cortez in her fight against Crowley, a 10-term congressman who many expected would one day succeed House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, as the top House Democrat.

At least three of Ocasio-Cortez's paid staffers will move temporarily from New York to Delaware by next week to help Harris ahead of her Sept. 6 primary against Carper, according to Corbin Trent, an Ocasio-Cortez spokesman. Another New York-based staffer will help with Harris's digital outreach, according to Drew Serres, a spokesman for Harris.

The spokesmen acknowledged that the move is partly a thank-you to Harris and five members of her campaign team who traveled to New York to campaign for Ocasio-Cortez in the closing days of her primary against Crowley.


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-deploys-campaign-staff-to-help-another-liberal-democrat/

[nycbos]

1. We should be fighting Republicans.

Not eating our own.

[HopeAgain]

2. How is this "eating our own?"

That statement is the establishment mindset that has lost us almost all access to power. The rabid maintenance of the status quo has left democrats on the outside looking in.

I'm all for new blood that brings excitement to liberal ideals.

[nycbos]

4. Carper is a friend.

The far left sounds a little like this.

[bigtree]

6. the 'far left'

...always sounds to me like a label republicans use, not something Democrats should embrace as a label for those in the party with which they may disagree.

[mcar]

12. "Establishment" sounds to me like a label some on the far left use

not something Democrats should embrace as a label for those in the party with which they may disagree.

[nycbos]

19. Help I am being repressed

[mcar]

22. Your MP references are spot on!

[nycbos]

24. Python is so versatile

[mcar]

25. Never gets old!

[bigtree]

26. I prefer 'old guard'

...more apt.

[mcar]

27. "Experienced" is most apt, IMO

[Cha]

47. Yes, Good Solid Experience that they're

putting to Good Use!

[sheshe2]

61. +1000

[Docreed2003]

201. That's some fine truth!

[pangaia]

85. I agree.. WHAT "far left?"

Maybe FARTHER left, but.. FAR?

[shanny]

166. preach

[Drahthaardogs]

188. We need some "far left"

To combat the far right. The mainstream guys roll over too easy. I like a little fire.

[HopeAgain]

199. Right with you

[brooklynite]

29. Name a Carper position you disagree with...

[H2O Man]

33. missionary?

[QC]

67. !

[ProfessorPlum]

35. He is completely a creature of the banks and corporations who are

incorporated in DE.

Other than that, he's fine. I was a resident of DE for more than 14 years. Banks are powerful there, and Carper won't bite that hand.

[George II]

62. That's grossly untrue. But while we're at it, do you know anyone in this country who is NOT....

....a "creature" of banks? Do you have a mortgage, checking account, savings account?

[H2O Man]

72. Look at his campaign contributors.

Then, compare his top 10 to Trump's top 10. Note the overlap, especially Blackstone.

Then, look at Alexandria's contributors.

[George II]

76. Who are his "contributors"?

[H2O Man]

79. Look and find out.

[George II]

81. I'm not making the accusations, but the bottom line is NO ONE can contribute more than $2700.

[H2O Man]

87. I'm not anti-Crowley.

I think that he has done many good things during his long career in the House. However, in recent times, he has had an average of $3 million in contributions from corporations, not counting contributions from individuals from the 14th district. Four of the top 10 this year were also among the top 10 that financed Trump in 2016. The biggest was the Blackstone Group.

Alexandria accepts no PAC money. Her campaign is financed by the grass roots. The corporations that benefit from Trump's tax cuts definitely are opposed to Alexandria, her message, and how she might influence the financing of our party's campaigns.

You can't serve two masters, as a carpenter once said. I think elected Democrats will be in a far better position to work for people, rather than corporations, if the Ocasio-Cortez model spreads.

[George II]

89. It is illegal for corporations to contribute to any Federal candidate campaigns.

[H2O Man]

91. Thus, corporations

play no role whatsoever in American politics. Can't argue with that thinking.

[treestar]

150. Who cares - what matters is how he votes.

[H2O Man]

165. The answer to that

is so fucking simple that I shouldn't have to say it on this forum.

Informed voters should care -- and obviously, enough did that Alexandria won a huge victory. Every thinking person should be capable of identifying the direct connection between a politician's financial backers and their votes. This contest highlighted that.

[radius777]

88. He has to serve the needs of his state,

like all politicians do whether Repub or Dem, they have to adjust to their region.

[shanny]

167. I assume you mean the people of his state.

Right?

[HopeAgain]

39. I couldn't find either

Universal Healthcare or a living minimum wage stated anywhere on his website.

[Nanjeanne]

196. Rolling back Dodd Frank regulations. Voting for Alex Azar as HHS

[George II]

59. "Lost us almost all access to power"? Carper has been in office for 18 years!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

132. Exactly... it's called "democracy"!

[bigtree]

5. that's the idea behind the general election

...this election is about Democrats competing for the chance to face the republican challenger.

That privilege isn't just for the incumbent.

[RandomAccess]

46. Well said

[treestar]

151. In Delaware the Rs are moderate

They will win.

The reason Coons is in versus Castle is because the Rs nominated an extreme right winger.

[Corvo Bianco]

83. We should be fighting for real representation

(Women, queer, and POC may have something to gain from a congresswoman with this person's life experience)

[bigtree]

147. check the thread

...the 'fight' here is against a Democratic nominee.

Not a word about the attacks on this Democratic nominee. Just detached worry about confronting some republican somewhere.

Not a word about her republican challenger. Just scorn and derision against this woman who won the votes of New Yorkers to earn the right to face that republican challenger in the general election.

Democratic candidates helping each others campaigns isn't some affront to the Democratic party.

Castigating this Democratic nominee for participating in that process, supporting the Democratic candidates of HER choice certainly is an affront to the party. It's an anathema to everything our primary elections are all about. It's antidemocratic, anti-Democratic, and looks to me to be against DU rules about attacking Democratic nominees.

That's what I'd term 'eating our own.'

[Gothmog]

184. AOC is hurting her district

She is going to get some really bad committee assignments

[bigtree]

3. primaries either challenge incumbents to do better

...or they elect a better candidate.

[RandySF]

8. Why does Cortez need to send a hit squad to meddle in another state?

[bigtree]

36. why label her staffers as a 'hit squad?

...harris's staff helped Ocasio-Cortez in her campaign, and Ocasio-Cortez is returning the favor.

I think it's unnecessary, unfair, and inflammatory to cast these staffers' help for this campaign as anything other than standard practice in primaries.

I realize some would prefer this challenger to stand alone without any outside help. Does the same apply to the Carper campaign? Of course not.

[Demsrule86]

64. She should not do this...

[bigtree]

78. so Carper shouldn't accept outside help with his campaign?

...Crowley shouldn't have?

Or are these rules of yours just for women challengers?

Just for this woman challenger?

[Demsrule86]

190. This has nothing to do with being a woman...Ms. Cortez does not even hold office and she is

getting involved in a state that is very different than her deep blue district. The ads could damage the incumbent and cost us the seat which would be disastrous. The challenger will not win in Delaware in my opinion and should not be running against an incumbent Democrat. The house is on fire and these folks want to rearrange the living room. Hopefully all the publicity will get more people out to vote...because that makes a difference in these primaries.

[Docreed2003]

202. Gee...where was this fire when AOC and the Our Revolution folks

Chose to endorse a Bernie syncophant in Kansas over an LGBT female??

You can't have it both ways

[bigtree]

208. I'm sorry, there are six Democrats running in that race, including another woman

... fact that AOC chose to support Bernie's senior staffer shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, given her work on his campaign.

She's clearly lending support (small 's') to candidates who share her views and supported her own campaign.

Making it like this was a race between Bernie's staffer and Davids is misleading, but I understand why it's being cast that way here. It serves the purposes of criticizing AOC. Seems some folks think everyone is entitled to their choice of Democrat in that race, except AOC.

'Syncophant?' And people wonder why there's opposition. There is really no respect for these Democratic candidates here, all because someone else's candidate is being challenged. Funny how some are thought to be immune from criticism, like 'syncophant,' but get exercised when their own candidates are labeled with pejoratives.

[Docreed2003]

209. I chose my words exactly as I intended

Welder has said he "reluctantly voted" for Hillary, not to mention that he was extremely vocal about Sanders not endorsing Clinton. So yes, I think syncophant is a reasonable description. If "respect for candidates" is what you're looking for, I would ask was it "respectful" to bash an opponent as a "corporate lawyer", because that was in a fundraising letter I received this week!

Nice deflection on my actual point though. You're criticizing folks in this thread for not supporting women candidates, the backbone of our party, and yet have no issues with the support of Sanders and AOC supporting Welder. Just admit that this is about supporting YOUR chosen candidate, don't try to wrap this in some other package. You support Bernie's positions and you choose to support candidates that sign on to those same ideals.

Frankly, I support the vast majority of Bernie's positions and I was a big supporter of his in 16. My biggest issue is that the approach being used by OR and others. Also, in fairness regarding the Kansas campaigns, Sander's speech there was probably one of his best and highlighted the need for unity in the Party.

[bigtree]

210. hold on, nowhere have I criticized anyone on this thread for not supporting women

..you've obviously misread something.

I would be just as happy having Davids as nominee, maybe more.

What you and many people who have criticized me overlook is that I'm not advocating for ANY candidate in primaries to the exclusion of another.

What I have done (outside of initially posting a QUOTE from AOC to Daily Caller and getting twisted and scoured by posters defending one candidate or the other who was being primaried by someone AOC supports) is defend the process, and those participating in it, from attacks here.

Listen carefully. What I've been defending and supporting consistently throughout all of these blatant attack threads on a Democratic nominee is these candidates right to run in our Democratic primary without being called subversive or a threat to the party.

Further, get this right, I defend AOC's right and reason to support and promote those candidates who supported her own run.

Those are NOT MY CANDIDATES. I live in Maryland. I just voted for a fine supporter of Bernie sander's campaign, NAACP lawyer and activist, Ben Jealous, for governor.

I am defending these candidates right and reason to compete in our primaries, and their right and reason to challenge those Democrats in power, as well.

It's not necessarily my habit or desire to challenge Democratic incumbents - I can't think of one I necessarily oppose - but I defend the right and propriety of challenging sitting legislators, if a candidate so sees fit.

I believe the threat (from these Democratic challengers) to our achieving a majority is far overblown. The voters that these candidates are bringing to the party primaries have every potential of adding to our party's voting base in November, whether their choice in the election wins or not.

It's up to the incumbent, whether they are a hindrance, or a help. It's not complicated. You don't see incumbents freaking out and calling challengers spoilers or accusing them of trying to divide the party as the cries here have gone.

That's because they realize this is an opportunity to expand their own voter base if they take the time and effort to reach out to these people who are disaffected for whatever reason from voting for them and draw them into their campaign, either in the primary or in the time leading up to the general election.

All the freaking out here. Primary challenges are an opportunity for an incumbent to improve, or for an improved candidate to take their place. I understand the partisan tendency (whether it's for candidate or party) to want to circle the wagons and protect the incumbent. That's fine and good.

But consider this. Incumbents should be prepared to defend their seats in our primaries. There should be no assumption or indication of privilege against challenge within our party. To assume so would eventually make those in power functionally, if not explicitly numb to demands for change which might upset their position of power.

Primaries are democracy at it's most essential and dynamic purpose. They make the reality of our predominate two-party system more 'democratic.' Primaries educate a candidate to the actual will of the electorate. Platforms, promises, commitments, epiphanies, are all products of spirited Democratic contests.

Initiatives get embraced by once-recalcitrant candidates when faced with an insistent opposition, backed by energetic supporters.

Consider these ambitious Democrats seeking the chance to represent their districts and states against the republican challengers. They are no more of a threat to the party than democracy itself.


So, dear Docreed2003. My efforts here are not partisan, except in deference to the Democratic party, which I always support at voting time, and I always vote. Almost 40 years now of involvement in politics and campaigns.

My efforts are in defense of these Democratic candidates, our Democratic process of elections, and these progressive supporters that our party desperately needs; not just for their needed votes, but for the energy, ideals, and initiative they offer our party.


If you take a word of this out of context, you're on your own. I'm tired of fighting against everyone's projection of what I'm trying to say.

[H2O Man]

43. Gracious!

Do you always oppose each and every candidate from the Democratic Party that shares staff with another candidate? Or is it only in certain cases? Are non-white Democrats working for change really "a hit squad" in your mind?

[disillusioned73]

123. Ding..

someone had to say it - thanks.. the coded language even here @ DU is.... concerning

[brooklynite]

32. Primaries also burn cash that could be used to win General Elections

[H2O Man]

44. True.

That's why we should all see the benefit of Alexandria's primary victory, since she spent relatively little money compared to Joe Crowley. Think of all those millions of corporate donations Crowley spent.

[brooklynite]

52. ...to win an absolutely safe Democratic seat.

[brooklynite]

53. Everty dollar Ocasio raised could have gone to beat an incumbent Democrat.

[H2O Man]

57. That's one way

of looking at it. In my opinion, the people of her district won. That's what democracy is all about. Despite the massive corporate contributions -- from groups like Blackstone, a huge Trump contributor -- the people won.

[radius777]

86. there was very low turnout

which overrepresents the views of activists, and thus not democratic at all.

if she faced a larger voting pool it's unlikely she would have won.

[H2O Man]

134. Sour grape flavored speculation.

First, the Democratic primary was, by every definition, democratic. The inactivists are overrepresented in your claim, which has no factual basis.

Second, while mid-term elections -- including primaries -- are virtually always "low turnout," this was the first time in over a decade that Democrats in the 14th district had a choice. Once again, 2018's primary was the true definition of democratic.

Third, she did face a large voting pool. It's true that a large percentage opted to not vote. Those who recognize that voting is both a right and responsibility voted for her overwhelmingly. I love the smell of democracy in action. Reminds me of victory.

[Demsrule86]

66. That is why I hate this...and I have to say giving Ms Cortez the benefit of the doubt...hope she

wins and all. She is the Democratic candidate but this? She shouldn't do it.

[Tatiana]

182. That's the biggest downside.

We really need the cash to compete in the general if we're going to wean ourselves off our corporate sugar daddies and mamas.

[octoberlib]

7. I just saw on NYT that Crowley's Running

as a 3rd party candidate. In most districts this would mean a Republican win.

[RandySF]

15. Wrong

Candidates in New York are often nominated by multiple parties and Crowley is still on the ballot for the Working Families Party Line. Crowley rill not actively run. Cortez will be on the ballot in a neighboring district on the Reform Party line.



https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/11/nyregion/ocasio-cortez-primary-third-parties.html

[octoberlib]

16. Good thing to know. Buzzfeed tweeted the

article and then acted like it was betrayal. I’m at work and didn’t read the article

[mcar]

38. Think Progress has done the same

I'm asking them to correct their misconception.

[George II]

60. Back in the late '60s, maybe '70s, there were four "major" parties in NY. It was not unheard of....

...that some candidates were on the ballot on the Democratic, republican, Liberal, AND Conservative lines.

[crazycatlady]

101. the Conservative line still exists

Democrats have WFP (Working families party) and WEP (Women's Equality Party).

[George II]

97. "Cortez will be on the ballot in a neighboring district"? Is that true?

How can one candidate run in two districts? Isn't there a residency requirement?

[KitSileya]

104. She had to decline the "honor"

She won the Reform Party primary because about 9 people wrote her in, she wasn't a nominated candidate. It is illegal to stand for election in two districts, so she promptly declined to be on the ballot.

I'm more interested in hearing about the claim that Ocasio-Cortez was a leader of the Justice Democrats when they decided to focus their funds on only one race and one candidate - her own. There were something like only two members on the committee or board that made the decision. Somebody claimed this on twitter, but I didn't have time right then to read the article linked, and so I lost the thread.

[bigtree]

108. there was so much support for her in that district that VOTERS wrote her in

...so much for people here claiming her support was shallow or narrowly restricted to a slice of her district.

And she did decline the honor. Twisting this Democratic candidate, Ocasio-Cortez's success into something nefarious is a curious way to support our party.

[shanny]

168. Do point out that Cortez will be on the ballot in a neighboring district

because voters wrote her name in. And Crowley could remove himself from the ballot by declaring he has moved out of state--which he has. Or does he hope to pull a Lieberman?

[Demsrule86]

191. He may not be running, but name recognition alone could garner him a win.

That would be awkward for us...hope it doesn't happen.

[mcar]

9. Why is she not helping Democrats campaign against Republicans?

This is ridiculous and not a good sign for November. Some people will never learn.

[bigtree]

30. she's doing both

...this candidate she supports will face a republican in the general election.

Primaries aren't betrayals of the party. They serve to advance Democratic issues and concerns, along with those who support them. They bolster the eventual nominee with voter support for those issues.

I suppose the other campaign shouldn't have helped Ocasio-Cortez's? This is just a return of favor for their support of her campaign.

Countless, countless Democratic campaigns have been run this way. Go back to Carper's initial bid for the seat, Crowley's initial bid for his seat. You will find candidates supporting each other's campaigns in their primaries.

To suggest this is something untoward or unduly confrontational to the Democratic party is nonsense.

[mcar]

34. I am well aware how primaries are run

The point I am making is that, given the current situation, this is counterproductive and feeds into the R and MSM "Dems in disarray" narrative.

Carper is a solid liberal. Why should he be primaried now? We should be working together to elect and re-elect Democrats, not causing conflict.

[bigtree]

37. That's not the way our democracy works. I see you profess to understand this.

...why have primaries for incumbents, at all, mcar?

Silly question, right?

[mcar]

40. You missed the point

Again.

I'm done with this.

Have a great day.

[bigtree]

45. the point seems to be that you favor incumbents like Carper and don't think he should be challenged

...but that's what primaries are there to sort out.

The seat isn't his by virtue of experience. It's there for the voters of Delaware to fill with the candidate of their choice. Either, if elected, will be challenged to fight the republican challenger. That's what these contests are all about.

Is someone feels the incumbent isn't representing the issues they support, they may step up to challenge them. It's not an affront to the party, it's a bid to improve the party, at least in the challenger's view. Demonizing them for this is absurd, and a severe take on what has been a staple of our democratic process of elections for decades.

These women running just don't deserve all of this scorn for participating in a process that countless incumbents and challengers have weathered and participated in with zeal and ambition, including Carper and Crowley.

No one says you have to like the challenge or agree with it, but suggesting there's something untoward about it is just nonsense.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

54. I think that the issue here

is not Carper being challenged in a primary. It's about staff being diverted from Cortez's GE campaign to campaign in another primary (against an incumbent Democratic Senator no less) in another state. That just doesn't seem helpful/productive to me. Extra staff would be better used to campaign against vulnerable Republican incumbent House members or vulnerable Republican incumbent Senators. Or, even better, maybe use that extra staff to support vulnerable Democratic incumbent Senators in red states.



Just my $0.02

[bigtree]

55. as I've said a couple times in this thread

...there's is nothing untoward or wrong about helping out each others' campaigns.

The notion that they aren't challenging republicans is wrongheaded. They both are challenged to win their campaigns against republican opponents.

Moreover, help in campaigns is normally the product of agreements between candidates, not something that lends itself well to self-appointed advocacy. In this case, there's a clear sharing of interests between the Harris and Ocasio-Cortez campaigns, as well as time and resource.

It's not clear that any other campaigns have asked for or would accept their help, and I've not heard either say they would object to being asked.

Also, there's the issue of money. Financial assistance is often much more consequential to a campaign. Incumbencies enjoy a clear and often overwhelming advantage with contributions coming from outside the state, as well as from within. And there's no indication to me that Carper has forsworn outside help to his own candidacy.

[treestar]

152. The entire state of Delaware is not a safe district the same way Ocasio's is

Both parties are rather moderate. The R can win this Senate seat if the D is too far left. The flip occurred with Coons v. O'Donnell. The Rs screwed themselves out of that seat by nominated O'donnell rather than Castle. Castle would have won. This would be giving that seat back to them.

[bigtree]

159. I'm confident your state's Democratic voters can sort all of that out

...this is less about a successful result of Harris' primary challenge on this thread, than is is about her right and others' right to stage a primary challenge.

Critics act as if the challenge, itself, is some sort of betrayal. Why even hold a primary, if it's just a cynical exercise to protect the incumbent?

The other issue on this thread is a criticism of these two campaigns sharing support from within their ranks. These are normal functions of primary campaigns, not some untoward or improper attack on the Democratic party, notwithstanding the value some in Delaware place in the Carper incumbency.

It should be obvious that I'm not really trying to make one outcome or the other happen with my defense of these candidates' exercise of the political process. It should be obvious, because I have not engaged in the details of the campaign. That's deliberate.

I was a Bernie OPPONENT. I have been (and continue to be) one of the most persistent defenders and promoters of the Democratic party and Democratic leadership who posts here. I don't normally wear that on my sleeve, but I know well many here must have their mouths agape watching me defend this Democratic Socialist.

But, only one candidate is being called out for politicking in this case. It's a shameful double standard, and a hyperbolic sham of an argument to suggest AOC's election victory, or her reaching back to pull up the Democrats in Delaware who helped her succeed is something untenable or improper.

[treestar]

162. I guess it is because in the process, it seems inevitable that

she will go negative on Carper and call him establishment - maybe she will not, but that's the thing the progressives to the left of Carper will object to. Like with Hillary, that negativity sticks even if not true. So normal functions of primary campaigns can end up like that. Which is normal and fine normally, but this is Trumplandia now. We do not want to flip this seat Republican and that's the unfortunate risk.

The Rs had a sure seat when former Governor and Rep. Castle ran for Senate - the Rs democratically in their primary chose a farther right candidate (the right does this too - we say they are establishment and not progressive enough and the right finds people like Castle to be establishment and not conservative enough) and so they lost. That flipped a seat to D that would have been R. Delaware now has two D Senators. It is full of moderates and centrists and usually was "fair" and gave one to each party. Delaware is tiny, so its 2 Senators have undue influence population wise.

This running of progressive enough candidates should be tried in some state or district that is very red. If they ended up winning, it would prove the point.

[bigtree]

163. never mind

an identical post just got locked.

So much for defending progressive politics here.

[JHan]

185. ++++++

[Cha]

48. ..

[shanny]

169. Because it is primary season?

They're both Democrats, aren't they? Or are some Democrats more equal than others?

[Demsrule86]

175. It risks putting a Republican in the seat and not all Democrats are not equal and incumbent has an

advantage in the general... there should be no primary.

[shanny]

176. Just crown the incumbent? Yeah, OK.

What would we be then? The Anti-Democratic Party?

But you are absolutely correct: not all Democrats are equal. Some are better than others.

[Demsrule86]

189. Yes , in the age of Trump who plans a 90,000 bed concentration camp crown the incumbent

because a fucking primary doesn't matter if we lose...the important thing is to win a general. And it seems to me these primaries are completely useless as the make up of Congress or the Senate will not be changed if a blue seat stays blue. But if a Democrat challenges a Democrat and we lose the seat...it is catastrophic this year and so not worth it.

[shanny]

195. We will continue to disagree.

[R B Garr]

197. LOL, you should Google Ocasia's own words about

different kinds of Democrats. I doubt you will appreciate the irony, though.

[George II]

84. Sorry, this candidate she supports will most likely not be facing anyone in the general election.

The big question is, will that candidate support the winner of the primary?

[bigtree]

92. you know that's not what's at issue here

...why is this woman the ONLY person challenging an incumbent you've chosen to bash here at DU?

Why is it proper for you to bash this Democratic nominee for doing what countless candidates have done, including Crowley and Carper: accepting outside help for primary campaigns?

[George II]

94. You're exaggerating, and misrepresenting what I've done, i.e.,...

...."the ONLY person challenging an incumbent you've chosen to bash here at DU"

On what do you base that, if anything?

[bigtree]

98. I'll rely on something you said to me George

...I haven't seen it.

[George II]

99. I don't understand this. What are you "relying" on if you "haven't seen it"? As we used to say....

..."do what?"

But I really do appreciate you repeatedly calling me a liar. Thanks!

[bigtree]

109. you did lie about Ocasio-Cortez's primary challenge. Whether you're a 'liar' remains to be seen

...I'm certainly not calling you a liar. I am saying your claims are untrue, made deliberately or not.

A primary challenge to a sitting Senator is by no means 'unprecedented' as you claimed.

Interesting the way you couched your claim. You employed a standard way of spreading misinformation to make that false statement, and I think that effort of yours amounts to advocating against this Democratic nominee for doing little more than participate in the democratic process of elections.

[Demsrule86]

192. What race is she helping to defeat Republicans and not targeting sitting Democrats?

[still_one]

10. I find it interesting that they are implying that the voters of state of Delaware share the same

politics as the voters in Cortez's district in NY, simply based on the fact that both Cortez and Harris shared the same uphill odds

While no doubt if if Carper lost the media would have a hey day pushing the theme of a major paradigm shift within the Democratic party, I suspect if Carper won very little will be said

[Cha]

14. There will be a lot said on this board when Harper Wins.. Tweet from him on Kavanaugh..

Link to tweet

[still_one]

17. Agreed Cha. I was just point out how the framing of this article makes some assumptions based on

very little facts

[Cha]

20. Oh I know.. I was just trying

to make the best of the same ol tired dereliction of duty that passes for our press.

You're probably right they won't make much of it when she loses.. it doesn't fit their "shocking" new agenda.

[Cha]

11. Senator Tom Carper Tweet on Kavanaugh..

Last edited Fri Jul 13, 2018, 03:57 PM - Edit history (1)

Link to tweet

I like him.. I like his experience

Edit-spelling

[mcar]

13. Gee, he sounds so "establishment"

[Cha]

18. The word they're looking for is

EXPERIENCED.

They can take their stale ol "establishment" insult and ***** ** ***** *** *** **** *****!

mcar

[tonyt53]

21. Bingo!

[mcar]

23. With everything we're facing, now is not the time to pull this infighting

And, IIRC, these are some of the same people who keep saying we need to unite to beat Rs in November.

This is confusing to me. "Let's primary sitting Democrats who are solid liberals," and "we all need to work together" just don't seem to fit.

[LisaM]

153. Yes, thank you.

That is an apt summary.

[mcar]

158. ...

[treestar]

155. Yes, that's big value in Delaware too

Small state - so it sends the same people back over and over and lets people go from governor to senator to representative and back.

Carper was once governor and the current governor was in Congress.

Castle was governor and then US representative, until the Rs were too stupid to nominate him for Senate rather than Witchy-Poo O'Donnell, so the Democrats got that seat. The more moderate candidate will win.

Biden was returned over and over again to the Senate from age 30 on, as a small state got more out of a long-term Senator being chair of committees and so on. Then Obama made him Veep and the state is full on for the "establishment."

[Cha]

164. Thanks, treestar! Maybe

Biden will come and campaign for Tom Carper!

[Renew Deal]

28. Carper is a safe and reliable Democratic vote

Not sure why she would mess with him. Her "staff" would be much more useful in NY fighting actual republican collaborators in the IDC.

[dansolo]

31. Not even elected and she is meddling in another state's candidates?

Carper is a good Democrat. He is also my senator. I will gladly be voting for him in the primary.

[bigtree]

41. so Carper is entitled to outside help for his campaign

...because, incumbency?

[H2O Man]

49. It's curious how

some are attacking the candidate of the Democratic Party here on this thread.

[bigtree]

50. it's been a puzzle to me, H2O Man

...I didn't expect this level of resistance from within our ranks to progressive women running to challenge incumbent candidates.

The most surprising is how void of actual issues and policy positions these criticisms have been. Terms like 'far left' are gaining fashion here to defend the old guard, and label Democrats who may hold another belief or policy position.

I like the presence of young candidates in these primaries. They often bring fresh perspectives and represent issues which have been neglected or ignored by the incumbent.

In Carper's case, for instance, I notice he voted in favor of the Keystone pipeline. In my view, that alone deserves a primary challenge.

[BeyondGeography]

51. A successful insurgent candidate

How dare she, I guess.

[bigtree]

56. she persisted.

[Demsrule86]

68. I don't give a damn about any candidate or any primary...if we have safe Democratic seat than hands

off...go after the Republicans...because you aren't helping us defeat Trump.

[bigtree]

73. our primaries don't bar challenges to 'safe' Democrats

...it's outright sophistry to suggest that launching a primary challenge to an incumbent is some sort of capulation to republicans.

It's amazing how anti-democratic your suggestion is. Apparently you believe incumbency is some shield against a primary challenge. How inspiring. Bashing this woman exercising her constitutional right to compete for the chance to face the republican challenger is some insidious shit.

What's remarkable about this treachery against this Democratic nominee here is that she's the ONLY Democrat challenging an incumbent who has been the subject of scorn here. The ONLY ONE.

[Demsrule86]

193. No kidding, but one would think with so much at stake these folks wouldn't do it. It risks the

seat. No oen is saying primaries are forbidden, but just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do it...money spent here is less money for taking the majority...and I don't give a damn how wonderful these progressive are ...if we don't get a majority, it won't matter.

[Cha]

42. Good to hear from someone whose Senator is Tom Carper, dansolo..

Link to tweet

Just saw this tweet from him..

[George II]

58. I've got to be nice, but message to Cortez - GMAFB!

You haven't won anything but a primary by garnering the votes of 6% of your district's registered Democratic voters, and you're "deploying" your workers to try to unseat a Senator that's been in office for 18 years?

You're doing more harm than good. Concentrate on your own race until you win your own election, PLEASE!

[Demsrule86]

70. She could lose the general...stranger things have happened.

I want all Democrats to win however. But in two years...that seat will be up for grabs.

[Demsrule86]

63. I am done with this nonsense...challenging Dems instead of Republicans...

Cortez should stop...while her seat is safe, we could lose Delaware. This is why I worry when candidates are supported by OR or Sarandon.

[RandySF]

65. This seat was Republican once upon a time

Carper beat William Roth by surprise.

[Demsrule86]

69. Exactly, this primary opponent could cost us the seat...We have a Democrat in place...now

go find a Republican to beat. Delaware is a moderate state.

[bigtree]

77. that's NEVER been a standard against a primary challenge

..running giving fealty to republican dominance is a weak way to represent a progressive party.

How many other candidates have YOU bashed on DU for challenging an incumbent? How many?

HOW MANY???

ONE. ONE candidate is ripe for your bashing here for launching a primary challenge against an incumbent.

ONE. This woman.

ONE.

Shame.

[Demsrule86]

194. It should be a consideration and this is why we lost in 16 and have lost the courts for

a generation. While some fret about primaries , they ignore the consequences of a loss which are huge for us at this point. Failure to stop Trump now by taking one branch or both of Congress will empower him to do worse things. I find babies in cages way more important than the 'right' to run in a primary.

[bigtree]

71. oh bullshit

...bashing this woman for doing what thousands of candidates have done - share resources and support with other Democratic campaigns, what Carpar and Crowley certainly accepted in their own campaigns - is despicable and un-Democratic.

It's an outright lie that she's doing something that's even unusual in primaries. Stop bashing this Democratic woman for supporting and promoting DEMOCRATS.

In effect YOU are actively railing (campaigning) against this Democratic nominee for doing nothing more than supporting a fellow Democratic candidate.

Just because it isn't YOUR candidate doesn't give you the right to rag on this Democratic nominee here for exercising her constitutional right to free association with other Democratic candidates.

DU has a rule against bashing our Democratic nominees. There has to be a limit to this foolishness here.

[George II]

74. I don't have many statistics, but it is almost unprecedented that someone would primary....

....a sitting Democratic Senator. Doing what "thousands of candidates have done"? Huh?

Yes, DU has a rule against bashing our Democratic nominees. Inasmuch as there will be a primary in September, for this seat there IS no Democratic nominees. Wait until after the primary .

PS - it's Carper, not "Carpar", and this Senate seat in Delaware has little to do with a House seat in New York City.

[bigtree]

82. that's a lie

...right on the face of it.

Don't think you can make your point fucking with me about my mispellings.

Ocasio-Cortez is not the first person to challenge a sitting Senator in a primary. It's a ridiculous suggestion. Check Dianne Feinstein's campaign challenge, for one.

Ocasio-Cortez is a Democratic nominee. She shouldn't be campaigned against here. This effort of your and others to bash her repeatedly in multiple threads for participating in a Democratic primary should be against the rules.

[George II]

90. A "lie"? Really?

[bigtree]

93. Feinstein has a prominent Democratic challenger. Where's your criticism of that effort?

...strange that you're just obsessing on this woman nominee for our party from New York.

AND, YES, IT IS A LIE THAT IT'S 'UNPRECEDENTED.'

Stop campaigning against Ocasio-Cortez here for doing nothing more than participate in our Democratic primary system, like countless nominees before her.

[George II]

112. Okay, when was the last time someone primaried an incumbent Senator in Delaware?

You can't use California as an example, they have the "jungle" primary where Democrats and republicans run in the same primary and the top two wind up facing each other in the General Election. Democrats run against incumbent Democrats in order to try to assure that two Democrats are on the ballot in November, which is what happened.

[bigtree]

117. that should make no difference at all to anyone who respects the democratic process

...if someone feels one of these Democratic legislators is neglecting, hurting, or ignoring an issue or concern, they can run a primary campaign against them to determine who VOTERS want to serve.

Ocasio-Cortez didn't invent the votes for her, she didn't obtain them through fraud or any other illegality or impropriety. She earned them from voters in the campaign. Respect the voters of NY, George.

[Demsrule86]

172. If we lose Deleware that is another vote for Trump shit and it does matter...no one is neglecting

anyone ...this is a moderate district. like primaries are not the end all be all and if a primary only causes a loss in the general than what is the point? We get a fucking Republican...this sort of purity is what cost us the election in 16. I hope the woman endorsed by Ms. Cortez goes down in flames...she is running ads with the help of Ms. Cortez against a sitting Democrat who has a hell of a better chance to win a general than she does. Anyone involved in this sort of thing, better think twice if they are looking to enter national politics...I will not vote for anyone who has engaged in this sort of behavior in a primary. It shows a lack of party loyalty and judgement.

[bigtree]

180. Delaware, Carpers' seat doesn't look at risk from Harris

...what's at stake there is progressive voices drowned out by a reflexive desire to appease conservative voters.

[Demsrule86]

187. I am worried about the ads weakening him and allowing the GOP to take the seat.

[Demsrule86]

173. I have written pages about how the Feinstein challenger is dead to me in future national

primaries...I am against all such primaries...but the Delaware one is in a moderate state and could cost us the general...I am completely pissed about it.

[treestar]

156. Yes, this is a Senate seat and Delaware is moderate

Not the jurisdiction for this sort of thing.

[Demsrule86]

171. This is an OR kind of thing...can't stand them. They would rather elect a Republican than a

Democrat.

[ecstatic]

75. Strike 2.

[Bleacher Creature]

100. Yeah, and now I feel like an idiot for saying something nice about her the other day.

We've got one shot at saving this country, and it involves electing as many Democrats as possible this November.

[bigtree]

107. um, she's running as a Democrat

...so is Harris.

These are Democratic candidates helping each others campaigns. If nominated by voters, Harris will join Ocasio-Cortez in facing off republican challengers.

How that gets twisted into something nefarious is what makes this forum special, I guess.

[Demsrule86]

174. Primarying a sitting Democrat in a moderate state. I am sorry that is wrong. It is risking a

majority...waste of time and money.

[bigtree]

181. tell to the state's progressive voters

...whose needs and concerns take a back seat to mollifying conservatives over discredited and corrupt republican policies.

[Demsrule86]

186. I have different priorities...I want to stop Trump. I don't give two fucks about ideology this

year. I am a progressive and would not do this... thus don't say progressive voters as if the Democrats targeted are not fine Democrats...this is about advancing an ideology that may not be possible to do in the states targeted and risking the majority...it is exactly like 2016 ...and this is why I despise OR and don't support their candidates in primaries. I would have thought that such voters would have learned their lesson in 16. But if Trump keeps both houses, it is going to get much worse.

[Stinky The Clown]

80. Isn't that special?

I recall a recent presidential campaign that sorta went like this.

[aikoaiko]

95. This is what democracy looks like.

'

If Carper is so great, then he has nothing to worry about.

If not, the people of Delaware have a choice.

Win or win.

[treestar]

157. The Democrats of Delaware have a choice

The people have a choice in November, and it could well be the Republican. This is not like Ocasio's district.

[jalan48]

96. Great to see the voters getting a choice.

Maybe we can learn something from it, if we're willing to listen.

[Qutzupalotl]

102. Randy Credico supports Ocasio-Cortez. That scares me.

Yes, the friend of dirty trickster Roger Stone, Julian Assange and Wikileaks. Who tonight is anti-Wikileaks for some reason. He supports her and Carper's opponent. In both cases unseating incumbent Democrats.

I want to like her. I do like her. I might even be a Socialist. But I do not trust this Credico guy at all. He is no friend to Democrats. Every move, every tweet seems designed to weaken our party, weaken trust in law enforcement and basically ratfuck us. So I do not like where this is going.

[kcr]

118. He's not the only one

She is cozy with quite a few sketchy people. It's the Our Revolution connections. Corporate media has given the impression that OR is the standard flag bearer of the left because they love the Dems in Disarray narrative, but they aren't. There are plenty of us lefties who want nothing to do with them. I like her policies too, but I'm never surprised when an OR candidate ends up a disaster.

[JCanete]

103. And the sitting incumbents help each other and campaign for each other in numerous ways....

why shouldn't she do this? She has an idealism that favors this candidate over the other. When Boxer and Biden went out and campaigned for Lieberman against Lamont, presumably that's what they were doing....in a perfect world....

But that of course is fine and dandy with people here because incumbency is what is most precious. Whatever. its weird to me.

[ucrdem]

105. If she has yet to be elected to any office, who is paying for this "growing campaign staff"?

And who paid for her primary challenge?

[bigtree]

106. all of that is transparent in her campaign

...everyone here knows that the two incumbents enjoyed access to big money donations, much of that coming from people and entities which essentially financed their entire political careers.

It's also well known that Ocasio-Cortez doesn't accept big money contributions, or money from lobbyists.

The Intercept reported a week before the election that Crowley was holding a fundraiser with the GOP-associated lobbying firm BGR Group, which represents major defense and pharmaceutical companies along with a variety of other corporations.
https://www.alternet.org/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-proves-money-doesnt-win-elections-are-democrats-listening


Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D)

raised: $300,709

spent: $194,763

cash on hand: $105,946

Open Secrets: 06/06/2018


Crowley outspent Ocasio-Cortez 18-1, and she told CBSN in May that the average contribution to her campaign was $17 a person.

"We have blown through well past $200,000 for this race, all in small-dollar working-class kind of contributions," Ocasio-Cortez told CBSN in May. "There's no way you can write policy without thinking of your donors, if you're taking an insane amount of money (from) special interest lobbies. So by not taking money from lobbyists, by taking money from working-class people, we can legislate for working-class people.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-bio-who-is-beat-joe-crowley-new-york-primary-tuesday/


“The first pledge Alexandria made to voters in this election was to commit herself to clean campaign finance,” her campaign website states. “As a candidate, Alexandria recognizes the corrupting influence of corporate fundraising on legislative policy. Where she stands farthest apart from her primary opponent Joe Crowley is in her steadfast refusal to allow her campaign to be underwritten by lobbyist contributions.”

Crowley outraised Ocasio-Cortez by 10-to-1, taking in $3.3 million compared to her roughly $300,000...
https://www.salon.com/2018/07/06/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-proves-that-money-doesnt-win-elections-are-democrats-listening/

[George II]

110. Actually we know very little about where her funding came from. 70% is "unitemized", meaning...

...the FEC reports don't have the details of those contributions.

[bigtree]

111. more nonsense

..the unitemized donations come from SMALL DONORS.

Over two-thirds of her campaign’s $300,709 fundraising came from small donors, or those who contributed $200 or less. It’s unclear how much came from inside the district since candidates are not required to itemize small donations on fundraising disclosures.
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2018/06/out-of-district-donors-backing-democrats/

[George II]

113. Right, they're unitemized so we don't know where about 70% of the contributions came from.

[bigtree]

115. small donors, George

..you can't make your shit mountain out of that molehill.

[George II]

116. WHO did the money come from? We don't know that now, do we?

[bigtree]

119. we know the money came in contributions of $200 or less

...and there aren't any reputable campaign finance advocates questioning her finances.

Just you trying to make hay out of small donor contributions. What a fucking joke. Not a goddamn word from you about big money donations to BOTH incumbents, not only during the campaign, but throughout their entire careers.

But we're supposed to believe you give a shit about campaign finance.

Stop campaigning against this Democratic nominee.

[George II]

122. Yes, I do "give a shit about campaign finance", have been a treasurer on five small mayoral....

....campaigns, two small PACs, and local Democratic committee for 10 years.

As for those "big money" contributions, we know where they came from.

[bigtree]

125. then stop this farce. You may fool folks here, but there is ZERO issue with AOC's funding

...the incumbent Crowley, however:

Intercept reported a week before the election that Crowley was holding a fundraiser with the GOP-associated lobbying firm BGR Group, which represents major defense and pharmaceutical companies along with a variety of other corporations.

https://theintercept.com/2018/06/19/joe-crowley-gop-lobbyist-bgr-fundraiser/

Carper's also a longtime recipient of big pharma dollars. In fact, Carper voted AGAINST importing cheaper prescription drugs from Canada. Funny coincidence, doncha think?

[George II]

137. The Intercept? You may want to do a little research about BGR Group, who they are, and...

....and who their clients are.

Also, check into campaign finance laws. Simply put, candidates can't receive money from "big pharma" or any companies, corporations, or business entities.

Since you brought up Crowley again, you should know that only 2.7% of his individual contributions are unitemized, meaning we know exactly where 97.3% of his individual contributions came from. That is "transparency".

[bigtree]

138. you really want someone with any seriousness or sense to look for scandal

...in a total raised by AOC of $300,000 in small donations, while you give short shrift and dismissals about these two incumbent's campaigns awash with millions in PAC money and lobbyist money?

This is pathetic and ugly.

When do you plan to stop advocating, campaigning against this Democratic nominee? No one of any credibility has accused her of even an impropriety in her funding, much less some kind of scandal over the majority of contributions under $200 that made up that funding.

If you have some sort of credible accusation, then spill it. This innuendo effort of yours (and several others on this thread) amounts to advocating/ campaigning against this Democratic nominee. All the more despicable that you bring ZERO evidence of impropriety along with this effort.

Is there going to be an end to your campaigning against this nominee? My guess is that next you'll be expressing concern over whether she'll win while you continue to work to undermine her campaign here.

[George II]

139. Lobbyists are prohibited from contributing to candidates except under the guidelines and limits....

...for individuals.

None of the contributions that you're complaining about are illegal, improper, or irregular, and you're mis-characterizing them.

If YOU have some sort of credible accusation against Crowley (who is not the subject of this discussion) or Carper, why don't you, as you say, "spill it".

[bigtree]

140. the incumbents raised millions from PACs, AOC raised $300,000 in small donations

...I understand that projection is in fashion in politics these days, but it's impossible to flip this script.

You've sunk to new lows of inanity expecting to get mileage for your innuendo about $300k in mostly small donor contributions. Anyone with a wit of care about campaign financing knows well the pitfalls and comprising nature of the big money donations the two incumbents have accepted for years, including in this election season.

This effort of yours stinks. It's nothing more than refighting AOC's primary. All the more pernicious is the void of ANY evidence of ANY wrongdoing on her campaign's part to go along with your string of dangling accusations on this thread.

When do you plan to stop campaigning here against this Democratic nominee?

[George II]

142. You keep talking about "the incumbents" - is she running against more than one person?

[bigtree]

146. so obtuse. When are you going to stop campaigning against this Democratic nominee?

...the level of dishonesty here against this Democratic nominee is stunning.

[ucrdem]

120. She seems awfully flush for a yet-to-be-elected challenger.

This scenario is painfully familiar and I'm not just talking about OR. This has all happened before in other races in other states. Under the circumstances I think it would be prudent for the current incumbent to stay on the ballot if possible.

[bigtree]

121. she raised $300,000

...flush?

It may well be possibhle to rewrite the history of this campaign on DU, but her campaign is well regarded for it's eschewing of PAC and lobbyist money.

The manner in which she ran her campaign and won without the benefit of big corporate dollars is well-documented. Her spending is not an issue, at all, unless someone tries to make it an issue here like you are (with nothing except innuendo and professions of ignorance about the financing to back up the leading questions.)

One of the incumbents people are defending here, Crowley, on the other hand, was reported before the election as the recipient of money from the GOP-associated lobbying firm BGR Group, which represents major defense and pharmaceutical companies along with a variety of other corporations

[ucrdem]

124. If she loses the seat it won't matter how clever a campaign helped her do it.

The same goes for the Senate seat she is sending a complete neophyte to challenge. I think we are both smart enough to know that there is no limit to RW trickery and there is nothing they won't stoop to. I don't live in NY but have relatives there and the state is notorious for dirty tricks.

[bigtree]

126. first of all, her republican challenger isn't even on the radar

..voters in her district are polling 6-1 in her favor.

Any more strawmen?

[ucrdem]

127. Neither was she and now she's a national sensation.

The scenario to worry about is that she somehow takes herself out of the race which could happen any number of perfectly innocent ways.

[bigtree]

129. there's the strawman I asked for

...

[ucrdem]

130. Right, nothing to worry about, just like there was nothing to worry about in 2015.

And then there was.

[bigtree]

131. I have to say

...from the DAY of AOC's election victory, the piling on this Democratic nominee here has been suffocating.

If critics who pop up on these threads with scorn and concern are genuinely worried about winning the seat she's running for, they should know they're doing their level best here to upset that outcome.

If you're concerned about winning the seat, support the Democratic nominee. Support the person New Yorkers voted overwhelmingly for with something more sustaining than innuendo and disdain.

Just once, I'd like to hear someone discuss just ONE of her policy positions. That seems to be completely off the radar of critics jumping on threads to demonize her doing little more than exercising her right to participate in the democratic process of elections in New York.

[ucrdem]

135. LOL, I discussed her "policy positions" when Susan Sarandon joined her team

right here:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=10783948

[bigtree]

136. so character assassination, innuendo, and strawmen

...that should guarantee the seat.

The party is in your debt.

[ucrdem]

177. Seriously, what are you talking about? I named two of her "policies," you've named none.

Frankly what the entire OR "platform" boils down to is one hollow and basically meaningless slogan, "medicare for all." And what that boils down to is ferocious opposition to the PPACA, a signature piece of Democratic legislation that I strongly support.

And if I spelled out what THAT boils down to my post would be deleted.

So there's her policy for you in fine.

[bigtree]

178. you obviously have contempt for her

...you really don't need to spell it out.

[ucrdem]

179. Can I politely ask what are her qualifications?

Does she have a law degree? Does she have any legislative experience? Her platform is four slogans that boil down to one objectionable one as I explained above. And even that is unoriginal.

And how many times have we heard that Dems don't have a deep bench? So she went after the guy on the bench! How is that supposed to be a good thing?

[bigtree]

183. maybe you should direct that to the voters in her district

...they obviously think she's qualified to represent them.

[ucrdem]

198. Why? She doesn't represent them and they haven't elected her to any office.

Their elected representative is currently Mr Crowley. So my questions stands, though I'm pretty sure we both know the answer.

[George II]

141. I think it's the other way around. From the day of her primary win she's been taking on....

....Democrats and criticizing them.

First it was Tammy Duckworth
Then it was Kirsten Gilibrand
Now, weeks after the Primary it's Joseph Crowley

And she's sending some of her people down to Delaware to campaign against Senator Carper.

Funny thing, I haven't seen a single comment from her recently about her republican opponent in NY's 14th Congressional District.

[bigtree]

145. Democrats criticizing other Democratic challengers in a primary is proper and expected

...what's not expected (or, I thought, allowed here) is actively working to undermine a Democratic nominee. Not a candidate, George. Not an defeated incumbent. Those are ripe and valid targets for strident criticism.

Democratic nominees are supposed to be safe from the type of advocating, campaigning against them that you're actively engaged in here. It stinks. It's anti-Democratic and, if not against the rules here, is obliterating the spirit of those rules.

[George II]

148. She's not in a primary against:

Tammy Duckworth
Kirsten Gilibrand
Tom Carper

or, as of June 26 Joseph Crowley. Why is she publicly criticizing each and every one of them, and on twitter no less? You don't find that "anti-Democratic"?

[bigtree]

154. she's not campaigning against a Democratic nominee on DU

...like you are.

More nonsense, trying to continue the back and forth between these politicians and the candidate you and others already sought to exploit in several threads here.

When are you going to stop campaigning/advocating against this Democratic nominee here for doing little more than participate in the democratic process of elections (and, in the instances you cited, exercising her perfect right to respond to criticisms and events)?

Why should anyone take your complaints about criticizing other Democrats seriously, when you're completely unconcerned about your own strident attacks on this Democratic nominee on this Democratic message board?

[stevenleser]

200. That's not a strawman. That person did not attempt to rephrase anything that you said. nt

[disillusioned73]

128. lmao...

you can't make this shit up...

$300,000 vs. $3.5 million and SHE has the sketchy funding.. this site has lost itz everloving mind...

[bigtree]

143. I think they know exactly what they're doing

...this is not only campaigning here against a Democratic nominee, it's a campaign of character assassination and innuendo from the same few people, on multiple threads about AOC.

Some even have the temerity to claim they're concerned about her losing the seat to the republican challenger, all the while working as hard as they can to
undermine her candidacy here.

I think I know now what ratfucking truly is.

[R B Garr]

144. +1, yes, we've heard all kinds of noise from Our Revolution that

multiple candidates on the ballot is great for voters -- more choices.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

133. Hope it was Bernie... good for him!

[lapucelle]

114. Corbin Trent?

Isn't he also a spokesman for Brand New Congress? I certainly hope that Democrat AOC will distance herself from that organization. They're running a former Republican/independent candidate in Tennessee's 2nd congressional district.

https://brandnewcongress.org/faqs/marc-whitmire/

Corbin Trent has made it clear that he has no relationship to the Democratic party, but now that AOC is our Democratic candidate, she may want a spokesman who can better articulate her message to the Democrats who elected her.

Theo: What is your relationship to the Democratic Party?

Corbin: Myself, personally? I have no relationship whatsoever. The organization has very little. We intend to run within their structures, and in their primaries, and we’re thankful that they’ve set up an infrastructure that’s going to allow candidates to run in primaries. But we think that the party has—a long time ago—stopped representing the needs of the American people.

http://inthesetimes.com/article/20341/brand-new-congress-progressives-republican-party-democrat

[treestar]

149. Off the cuff as one from Delaware

Not a good idea. Delaware is as centrist as you can get. And the Rs learned the hard way by nominating looney O'Donell the witch. We don't need to learn that on the left.

[George II]

160. +1,000,000

[shanny]

170. Off the cuff, don't you think the loons are still on the right?

tRump and company should repulse any actual centrist.

[stevenleser]

161. So, she's obviously not concerned that Crowley is still running. nt

[drray23]

207. I can see it coming.

With all the controversy she is generating and the fact she is ignoring her district, taking it for granted and going elsewhere to support OR candidates, I could see the voters voting Crowley back in out of concern she is not going to care about that district but instead use it to campaign around pushing OR's agenda. It's almost as if she is Bernie's understudy.

[lancelyons]

203. More democrat in fighting.

Its more and more starting to look like the democratic party is going to screw this one up.

Who is running the DNC and what the hell is going on.

[lancelyons]

204. I have a feeling the Bernie Sanders is behind this. He helped EFF things up on the last election

I have a feeling the Bernie Sanders is behind this. He helped EFF things up on the last election.

Why doesnt Tom Perez get all these people in the same room and get everybody headed in the same damn direction.

Crazy.

[lancelyons]

206. Thats a good point. She did make a mistake the other day and say help change the seat to red or som

Thats a good point. She did make a mistake the other day and say help change the seat to red or something similar.

it was considered a mistake but what if thats what she was thinking?

Even though the Democrats are generally more educated than republicans...

it does seem like the REpublicans are out maneuvering the Democrats.